It was Britain's "best-known secret", according to the Independent, throwing privacy laws into "chaos" (the Guardian) after "Bed devil" (Daily Mirror) Ryan Giggs was named in parliament as the "injunction love cheat" (Daily Express).

Or, if you're a headline writer for the Daily Star, it was all about "Shaming Ryan's Privates". Can you see what they've done there?

"Who, even a week ago, could have predicted a constitutional crisis between parliament and courts provoked by a footballer who played away?" asked a Guardian leader.

"The mere fact of publication on Twitter can't be an excuse for releasing the press from the internet's 'unfair' advantage ... To argue that the press must now be free to publish anything on Twitter places self-regulation itself in some peril.

"A period in the long grass may be a good idea to allow some sense of perspective to return to the debate."

The Sun played it straight with its splash headline "It's Ryan Giggs" assuming, given recent events, that few, if any people were going to reply: "What is?"

"Freedom wins" was the headline on the Sun's leader column. "Injunctions are sinister, allowing the wealthy to buy silence about their misdeeds," it proclaimed.

"The prime minister yesterday showed welcome support for the press, declaring it was 'unsustainable' for papers to be unable to print something everyone was talking about ... Anyone thinking of taking out a gagging order now knows what to expect." Just so long as an MP names them in parliament.

The Daily Mirror's headline writers proved rather more imaginative than the currant bun, with "Naming Private Ryan", which was not as showy as the Star, but with the added benefit of making a bit more sense.

"The world has changed and so must judges," it added. "A people's revolt on Twitter and a politician's revolt in parliament have changed the terms of the debate."

The Star defended Lib Dem MP John Hemming – whose own family life is best described as "colourful" – against accusations that he abused parliamentary privilege.

"He would never have been in that position if judges had done the right thing and lifted the injunction earlier," said the Star's leader column. "People power has shone through and twitter users have ended up as heroes for freedom of speech."

The paper also champions John Hemming, the "good man" who brought an end to the farce, according to Quentin Letts, while fellow columnist Richard Littlejohn calls on the prime minister to "keep his election promise to repeal the yuman [sic - we think he means human] rights act and put our politically motivated judges back in their boxes".

Clive Anderson, in the Telegraph, says no one comes out of the injunction business very well, including "embarrassed adulterers" for whom the agony is prolonged, discarded sexual partners who feel "even more aggrieved" and newspapers who "look rather desperate". Oh, apart from the "rich lawyers funded by some even richer footballers" for whom none of the press have any time for whatsoever.

The Telegraph's leader blames the "way the Human Rights Act was framed and later interpreted by the courts. It needs to be resolved".

The Times chooses not to address the issue in its leader column, but columnist Rachel Sylvester says the row over privacy is part of a deepening battle between judges and parliament. "Ministers are intending to try to seize power back from the judges," says Sylvester.

But what does Vanessa Feltz make of it all? Over to the Daily Express. "Former Big Brother contestant Imogen Thomas may not be the most endearing role model but seeing her struggle as the wealth of a footballer yesterday named as Ryan Giggs was used to muzzle her made her seem almost sympathetic."

• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediatheguardian.com or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".

• To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook